- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Black Kite ( talk) 09:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Kontera
AfDs for this article:
- Kontera ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No sources appear to cover the subject of this article in a depth sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Lots of brief mentions (ie, "...according to advertising firm Kontera.") and a lot of web presence (to be expected of a web advertising firm), but not significant coverage in independent sources. VQuakr ( talk) 03:36, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Edit to add - I figured a speedy deletion under criterion G4 would be pushing it since this version of the article is like 5 years old. Not opposed to a speedy if others think that is ok. VQuakr ( talk) 03:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - fails to meet WP:NCORP as well as WP:GNG. -- bonadea contributions talk 11:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete fails to meet WP:NCORP as well as WP:GNG. MatsTheGreat ( talk) 09:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- I understand the WP:NCORP and WP:GNG concerns, but it seems out of sorts to prioritize the "in text" and "advertising network" messaging from a 5 year old article about a space that changes rapidly, over numerous articles that clearly show that Kontera now analyzes trend data for content marketing. Right almost all of the external links on this page don't align with the current company description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaykolbe ( talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I have added some reliably sourced material to the article. I have not had time yet to check several sources (such as the WSJ, USAtoday, the NYtimes, and more which are currently displayed in the article’s External links). How will we ever provide the sum of human knowledge to the world if we continue to delete important information about a company in the new field of in-text advertising (just one small example of the damage we do)? X Ottawahitech ( talk) 06:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Black Kite ( talk) 09:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Kontera
AfDs for this article:
- Kontera ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No sources appear to cover the subject of this article in a depth sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Lots of brief mentions (ie, "...according to advertising firm Kontera.") and a lot of web presence (to be expected of a web advertising firm), but not significant coverage in independent sources. VQuakr ( talk) 03:36, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Edit to add - I figured a speedy deletion under criterion G4 would be pushing it since this version of the article is like 5 years old. Not opposed to a speedy if others think that is ok. VQuakr ( talk) 03:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 (talk) 13:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - fails to meet WP:NCORP as well as WP:GNG. -- bonadea contributions talk 11:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete fails to meet WP:NCORP as well as WP:GNG. MatsTheGreat ( talk) 09:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- I understand the WP:NCORP and WP:GNG concerns, but it seems out of sorts to prioritize the "in text" and "advertising network" messaging from a 5 year old article about a space that changes rapidly, over numerous articles that clearly show that Kontera now analyzes trend data for content marketing. Right almost all of the external links on this page don't align with the current company description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaykolbe ( talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I have added some reliably sourced material to the article. I have not had time yet to check several sources (such as the WSJ, USAtoday, the NYtimes, and more which are currently displayed in the article’s External links). How will we ever provide the sum of human knowledge to the world if we continue to delete important information about a company in the new field of in-text advertising (just one small example of the damage we do)? X Ottawahitech ( talk) 06:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.